I basically don't believe the Prez makes all that much of a difference. (How many would seriously "credit" Dubya with any of the decisions he made?) That's why I always doubted that all that great stuff Obama promised would see the light of day.

The Prez does not make much of a difference.

Although around these parts that point was up for grabs depending on the mood. On one day we would hear that it is all W's fault for the mess, and other days we would hear how he was just a puppet of Rove/Cheney/Big Oil and Co.

people who say that there's really no difference between presidents are being disingenuous or just demonstrating their ignorance. our country has had a major impact because of Bush that it wouldn't otherwise have had if Gore had beaten him. now, this isn't to say that Gore would have even been an effective president . . . but there would have been a very big difference in many ways (e.g., Supreme Court nominees). i could actually provide a long list of differences if i start with the Executive orders of Clinton's that were reversed and then list all that Bush signed that a president Gore likely wouldn't have signed . . . this list would be long and this isn't even getting at some of the major policy stuff that decides elections. we could then look at the people he's appointed (e.g., "Good job Brownie") and see how they've handled their position (e.g., Katrina). we could examine the cuts in funding for the NIH and the money that's been spent on Iraq (not to mention the thousands of lives). and maybe Gore screws up in other ways that affect other people, but it would have been vastly different.

Dubya was the mouth piece, the signatory, but the decisions were made by a lot of people behind the scenes ... who graciously allowed him to call himself the decider.

We also don't know what Gore would have done, but chances are that the people surrounding him would have been somewhat less bellicose than Dubya's staff.

Then again, the pressures of getting elected already brought Obama's initial positions closer to mainsteet ... like Israel, or Iran and Russia.And with the country split down the middle back in 2001, I truly wonder, whether a Democrat administration might not have acted similarly as the Bush administration. After all, most of the Dems also voted to invade Iraq .... so, who really knows.

Perhaps, there might have been a chance that the neocon views would have been less powerful, but I have the feeling that they expressed the deeper sentiments of America at the time. (Look at the rah-rah going on even here and at MCF.) America wanted revenge and had Obama been in a position, to actually (having had to) vote, who knows how he might have acted. He certainly has been rather circumspect as far as his voting record is concerned.

Now, that said, it will be interesting, how Obama will handle the current crisis, especially, since his first proposal has been struck down in Congress, before he is even in office. Will he have the chutzpah, to address the deeper problems? I just read that the mortgage lenders are already on a hew horse, the FHA insured mortgage deals. So, will he address the systemic faults of the economy?

As I said earlier, I don't question him selecting people from the Clinton era. That seemed more a thing expressed by the young Obamaites.

One will only be deceived if they fell hook line and sinker for Obama's pack of false hopes and promises he preached during his campaign. I'm surprised you feel you might be deceived Shoosh, they're all straw men, you know that.

One hot summer's day a Fox was strolling through an orchard till he came to a bunch of Grapes just ripening on a vine which had been trained over a lofty branch. "Just the thing to quench my thirst," quoth he. Drawing back a few paces, he took a run and a jump, and just missed the bunch. Turning round again with a One, Two, Three, he jumped up, but with no greater success. Again and again he tried after the tempting morsel, but at last had to give it up, and walked away with his nose in the air, saying: "I am sure they are sour."

Moral:It is easy to despise what you cannot get.

_________________________."...or am I a butterfly dreaming she's a woman?"

These are his policy positions that he will instruct his administration to enact. So you're calling his Agenda "pack of false hopes and promises"? Straw men?

Yes I am, we'll see what pans out, I may be wrong, it's happened before. Straw man, yes. They all have been. What makes him different? The political machine he's behind the wheel of is still the same machine, it didn't automagically change because of and election.

Originally Posted By: garyW

Someone doesn't agree with your way of thinking so you call a name? That always helps in making your point.

Dubya was the mouth piece, the signatory, but the decisions were made by a lot of people behind the scenes ... who graciously allowed him to call himself the decider.

Does it matter one whit whether George Bush was a puppet for Cheney or someone else or that he originated the stupid ideas himself? From all the books written from within the White House this fool was the one who said I want to invade Iraq and he didn't care how it gets done. Give me a reason.

But your statement is "Presidents do not matter." As if there is one homogenous military industrial complex behind Bush that would have pulled Gore's strings the same way.

If you believe that you believe in conspiracy theories and there is no arguing with conspiracy theories.

I basically don't believe the Prez makes all that much of a difference. (How many would seriously "credit" Dubya with any of the decisions he made?) That's why I always doubted that all that great stuff Obama promised would see the light of day.

The Prez does not make much of a difference.

Although around these parts that point was up for grabs depending on the mood. On one day we would hear that it is all W's fault for the mess, and other days we would hear how he was just a puppet of Rove/Cheney/Big Oil and Co.

More than anything, the prez sets the tone of the administration and acts as filter for legislation. Look what dubya neglected to filter. And look at his tone.

and you think the prez doesn't make a difference? Asleep at the wheel, my boy, you're asleep at the wheel. Where were you the last 8 years. No, not all that stuff had to happen. Very little of it did.

Your point -- that Obama's agenda is a pack of lies and empty promises-- is pure wingnuttery. You've got not one shred of evidence to back up that argument, but it's the same point being pushed by all of rightwing media pundits. Your point -- that those of us who support Obama's agenda have fallen for strawman promises -- is pure wingnuttery.

Wingnuttery ... look at many of the posts that have been started here lately. I've heard exactly the same over the last few days on TV from Kristol, Beck, Buchannan(s), Dobbs, Hannity. Obama has not backed off from his campaign positions, in fact he's restated them clearly and publicy on his transition website, but the noise out there (and here) is just making things up.

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.